STATE OF PUNJAB THROUGH THE MANAGER, GOVT. SEED FARM ASPAL, TEHSIL MUKTSAR, DISTRICT FARIDKOT Vs. COMMISSIONER, FEROZEPUR DIVISION, FEROZEPUR AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I. The Subiect of lis in writ petitions

(2.) ALL the writ petitions are at the instance of the State of Punjab against persons or their representatives who were erstwhile lessees to whom properties had been offered on lease for a specified period through the Manager, Government Seed Farm. Shorn of details relating to the respective properties that had been granted to each one of the private respondents in the three writ petitions, properties had been granted on lease for agriculture purpose on a stipulation that the lessee shall pay l/3rd share of the produce. In C.W.P. No. 12256 of 1989, the lease was executed in favour of Sh. Balbir Singh on 30.01.1968 for a period of one year. In C.W.P. No. 12257 of 1989, the lease had been in favour of Sh. Ujagar Singh through a lease deed dated 1.5.1973 again for a period of one year. The original tenant had died on 25.7.1987 and his legal heirs namely respondent Nos. 3 to 11 had given the possession of the land leased to the original lessee. In C.W.P. No. 12258 of 1989, the lease had been in favour of Sh. Teja Singh by lease deed dated 15.3.1964 and after the death of Teja Singh, his legal heirs namely the widow and some came into possession of the property.

(3.) THE Collector's dismissal of the petition that some other action must have taken is equally meaningless. The action of public authority to seek eviction against its erstwhile lessee after the completion of the notice period was perfectly competent. It must be remembered that by virtue of Section 117 of Transfer of Property Act, the provision relating to eviction contained in the Act are not applicable to tenancies for agricultural purposes. The principles laid down under the said Act, however, are applicable (See Ranga Iyengar v. Sivaswami Pandaram, :1978(1) R.CR.(Rent) 562 : AIR 1977 Mad 364). A continuance in possession after the expiry of lease by efflux of time puts the possession of lessee as at sufferance, liable for ejectment in accordance with law. The petition under PP Act is in accordance with law and hence tenable.